On 07/02/2013 14:54, Paolo Ciccarese wrote:
We also use CiTO and FaBIO for storing the bibliographic data and
those are based on FRBR.
Dear Paolo, Robert and Herbert,
I'm in Leiden at a conference with Bob Morris. We've just had a brief
discussion about the potential use of AO to
Hi David,
(And cc'ing the Open Annotation list as well)
Yes that looks fine. If the annotation is about the citation, rather
than the paper, then it should definitely target a resource that
identifies the citation. I don't want to comment on the use of Named
Graphs (see [2]) for the citation,
Dear David,
in general we have not been focusing enough on these aspects yet.
However, that is one of the top items in the priority list and it would be
great if you could participate to the discussion.
As Rob pointed out, with very few tweaks your example could work in
compliance with OA as
Thanks to you both. Tweak away to get this right! David
On 12/02/2013 17:44, Paolo Ciccarese wrote:
Dear David,
in general we have not been focusing enough on these aspects yet.
However, that is one of the top items in the priority list and it
would be great if you could participate to the
Thank you Robert!
I've just seen what I think is the new draft (february 5th). I will go through
it! In the meantime, I'm wondering what you think on the problem of keeping all
the annotations of a text in RDF vs. keeping them in a separate store and bind
them to entities in the RDF.
The use
Matteo,
if you want annotations interleaving with text, maybe you could use
RDFa? Here's one of the first RDFa annotations Google hits:
http://www.aclweb.org/anthology-new/R/R11/R11-2008.pdf
Martynas
graphity.org
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Matteo Casu mattec...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you
Hi Matteo,
in the Domeo Annotation Tool http://annotationframework.org we do exactly
that. We create annotation on text fragment(s), images, tables and we store
the annotation, together with the info for detecting the text fragments in
a RDF in a separate store. In fact, most of hte times we do
Hi Paolo,
my concerning was about the info for detecting the text fragment: do you use
a begin/end approach on the document (as in UIMA) without storing the body of
the text? If it is so, then everything is clear to me.
Forgive me, my point of view is still unripe on the subject, so probably
Hi Matteo,
you can do both. You can use begin/end or prefix/suffix. It depends on your
needs.
For instance, if I want to be able to transfer the Domeo annotation from
HTML to PDF I need to use prefix/suffix.
If the content you are annotating does not have problems of normalization
you can use
Hi everybody,
[my apologies for cross posting -- possibly of interest for both communities]
does anybody could point me to the major pros and cons in using the Annotation
Ontology [0] [1] vs. the NLP interchange format in the context of annotating
(portions of) literary texts? My impression is
Hi Matteo,
Something also to look at is the Open Annotation spec [1], which is being
produced out of the combination of the Annotation Ontology and Open
Annotation Model. It seems like there's a lot of community support around
it.
Paul
[1] http://www.openannotation.org/spec/core/
On Mon, Feb
Hi Matteo,
The Annotation Ontology has merged with Open Annotation Collaboration
in the W3C community group:
http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/
And Paolo is co-chair along with myself.
We're *just* about to release the next version of the Community Group
draft, so your interest comes
12 matches
Mail list logo
